Quote from: Mr. GC;586410Well if you click my username you can see my posts...

Show me.  I'm looking here - http://www.therpgsite.com/search.php?searchid=327049

This, from what I can find, is where you start:

Quote from: Mr. GC;585755Because people still aren't getting it here are actual examples of both good and bad play:

Good party starts off with divinations. They learn that they are up against:

A dragon.
A druid.
A psychic.
A shadow demon.
A pair of melee machines.
Various mooks.

From this they can deduce that:
They should have at least one person with See Invis and lots of Dispels for dealing with the big guys.
They should have Magic Circle so they are not mind fucked by the psychic.
They should all be flying so they are not one rounded by the melee machines.
They should be able to quickly put Wraithstrike on the melee so as to take out the dragon before it can move, otherwise people will likely die.
The druid is impossible to counter without knowing more about him, same for the shadow demon.
The mooks are dealt with by generic buffs and standard anti ranged defenses.

So they close in on the bell tower, cast Silence on it then take out the mooks quickly, spend a few rounds chasing the shadow demon around while it annoys the hell out of them, then they kill it before it can escape and warn the others. The group could leave now and do part two tomorrow, but let's say they don't.

Instead they keep advancing, take out the mooks outside as quickly as possible, then start systematically sweeping the main building. First they shake off the death blast, then kill its source... then they pick a door and kill either the psychic or the druid before he's really ready... and if they're fast they can get the other.

Then they come out, see they've gotten the dragon's attention already... it lasts long enough to get off one action, but with Greater Mirror Image and Wings of Cover the target survives at 3 HP. The melee machines come out last, see the all flying party, and either die or swim away in shame.

A few healing charges later and the party is fine.

Bad party vs same scenario:

At most they can learn about the dragon in advance. They're not even aware the other enemies exist, and as they'd get spotted 500 feet out from the bell tower they likely never will as the guards there can just rain down arrows and boulders... they won't do much at this range, but neither will the parties' attacks, and since it'd take 12-13 rounds to close the distance and get in there and longer to get out of engagement range the party will likely die even before considering they rang the bell, alerting everything in the area and giving the party about 5 minutes to GTFO or die to an overwhelming encounter. None of the major opponents need even reveal themselves as the group would die to the lowest mooks.

If by some miracle they actually survived that long they get brutally beaten down by the shadow demon... and not even the gods can help them deal with all the OTHER stuff all at once.

Again, show me where the scenario was defined to the detail you claim that it was.

Mr GC;

The death at -10 was optional in 1E. Its in the 1E dms guide.

I prefer negative Con myself.

Works great in practice.

Quote from: mcbobbo;586422Interesting side note, but if you're foreign to the Den, how do you know?

Because I can read where they are saying they do not give a fuck, and I can read where they are not coming here for the most part and can conclude from this that they do not care.

Quote from: mcbobbo;586423Show me.  I'm looking here - http://www.therpgsite.com/search.php?searchid=327049

This, from what I can find, is where you start:



Again, show me where the scenario was defined to the detail you claim that it was.

Several other posts also detailed it, but even just in that post...

Spotted 500 feet out - gee, I wonder if this could be a wide open area, as clearly if there were lots of stuff around they could get closer without being noticed?

12-13 rounds to cover 500 feet = translates to 40 feet per round. No one has a land speed that slow.

So we have a swamp, we have the party moving slower than usual, we have them in a wide open area... all of this is easy to work out. Now perhaps I'm spoiled, being as I am used to dealing with good players where all you have to do is give a vague hint in the right direction and they figure out 90% of the scenario by themselves but it isn't exactly hard to work out this is a wide open, wet area even before I specifically described it as a lake. And just to cut off more stupid posts - they were on a boat.

Just so everyone knows the exact probability if you're curious (and yet another example of GC being horrible at math) of the default method 1 stat generation in AD&D, here you go:



Source

That's a 23% chance of having a stat 15 or higher for one stat.  When you have 6 stats, and assign in order, the chance of a fighter having a 15 or higher Con (his second most important stat) is significantly higher than 9%.

And just so you realize, any chance greater than 0% that your buff... your attempt to help the party kills them instead is unacceptably high. So it can be 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%... If you are going to kill your own party, then cast Fireball, centered on yourself and just get it over with.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586434And just so you realize, any chance greater than 0% that your buff... your attempt to help the party kills them instead is unacceptably high. So it can be 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%... If you are going to kill your own party, then cast Fireball, centered on yourself and just get it over with.

Any PC has accepted a life of risk and danger, at some level, else they wouldn't be PC's. They'd stay home.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586434And just so you realize, any chance greater than 0% that your buff... your attempt to help the party kills them instead is unacceptably high. So it can be 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%... If you are going to kill your own party, then cast Fireball, centered on yourself and just get it over with.

Question.  When people point out to you that choosing a 5% chance of the fighter dying instead of a 25% of a TPK doesn't mean that it's a bad choice, do you purposefully ignore it just be an asshole, or are you legitimately that poor at reading comprehension?

Quote from: Mr. GC;586434And just so you realize, any chance greater than 0% that your buff... your attempt to help the party kills them instead is unacceptably high. So it can be 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%... If you are going to kill your own party, then cast Fireball, centered on yourself and just get it over with.

Speaking of which this is how 2nd edition plays.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586434And just so you realize, any chance greater than 0% that your buff... your attempt to help the party kills them instead is unacceptably high. So it can be 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%... If you are going to kill your own party, then cast Fireball, centered on yourself and just get it over with.

Nice shifting of goalposts, dickweed.

Not to mention, what you are saying right now is also laughably stupid.

Well done, I guess.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;586436Question.  When people point out to you that choosing a 5% chance of the fighter dying instead of a 25% of a TPK doesn't mean that it's a bad choice, do you purposefully ignore it just be an asshole, or are you legitimately that poor at reading comprehension?

Oh, it isn't that the Fighter dying instead of the characters that matter is bad. It's that you're relying upon:

1: The Fighter to save you.
2: Randomness to not screw you over.
3: The impossibility of a scenario in which you realize you are doomed before you actually are occurring.

And that means you've lost a dozen times over before considering the fight itself.

Quote from: Ladybird;586435Any PC has accepted a life of risk and danger, at some level, else they wouldn't be PC's. They'd stay home.

Any time a PC has to add "their allies" to the long list of things trying to kill them there's going to be some proactive ganking.

Quote from: Benoist;586439Nice shifting of goalposts, dickweed.

Not to mention, what you are saying right now is also laughably stupid.

Well done, I guess.

At no point in time did I move the goalposts. My stance always has and always will be that killing your own allies, including something that merely has a chance of killing them because you are trying to help them is pants on head retarded. The exact odds that you will kill your own allies is irrelevant beyond being a number greater than 0.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586210Hello ladies. Look at your party. Now back to me. Now back at your party. Now back to me. Sadly, they aren't me. But if they stopped buffing each other to death and started playing smartly they could win D&D like me. Look down. Up. Where are you? You're on a boat! With the group your group could win like! What's in your hand? Back at me. I have it. It's the rulebooks filled with all the good spells. Look again. The rulebooks are now diamonds! Anything is possible when your party kills the enemies and not each other. I'm on a Cauchemar.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586441Oh, it isn't that the Fighter dying instead of the characters that matter is bad. It's that you're relying upon:

1: The Fighter to save you.
2: Randomness to not screw you over.
3: The impossibility of a scenario in which you realize you are doomed before you actually are occurring.

And that means you've lost a dozen times over before considering the fight itself..

Wow.  That goalpost shifting just about gave me whiplash.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586430Because I can read where they are saying they do not give a fuck, and I can read where they are not coming here for the most part and can conclude from this that they do not care.

As opposed to someone like myself, who enjoys the 3e era of D&D but hadn't ever even heard of the Den prior to June or so of this year.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586430Several other posts also detailed it, but even just in that post...

I'm actually ready to call you on this.  Find me one, please.  Just one.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586430Spotted 500 feet out - gee, I wonder if this could be a wide open area, as clearly if there were lots of stuff around they could get closer without being noticed?

Obviously a tower would be built to 'tower' over the surrounding landscape.  A tower that doesn't tower is just a building.  So it doesn't really say anything except that people in the tower have a site line over the treetops.

Also it bears noting that D&D worlds are almost always Earth-analogue.  So unless it has been explicitly stated elsewhere, what holds true on Earth holds true in, e.g., Mystara.  That being said, very, very few places on Earth have zero trees.

But you're just moving the goalposts again, aren't you?

Quote from: Mr. GC;58643012-13 rounds to cover 500 feet = translates to 40 feet per round. No one has a land speed that slow.

Which edition?  E.g. in 3rd, almost every party does, even on a double-move option:

Quote from: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Movement_SpeedSpeed

Your speed tells you how far you can move in a round and still do something, such as attack or cast a spell. Your speed depends mostly on your race and what armor you’re wearing.
Dwarves, gnomes, and halflings have a speed of 20 feet (4 squares), or 15 feet (3 squares) when wearing medium or heavy armor (except for dwarves, who move 20 feet in any armor).
Humans, elves, half-elves, and half-orcs have a speed of 30 feet (6 squares), or 20 feet (4 squares) in medium or heavy armor.
If you use two move actions in a round (sometimes called a “double move” action), you can move up to double your speed. If you spend the entire round to run all out, you can move up to quadruple your speed (or triple if you are in heavy armor).

Likewise, that same site says, "It costs 2 squares of movement to move into a square with a shallow bog", so you're well under 40/round if it were a swamp at all, by your own example.

Let's check the math - because again, I suck at math - 500/12 = 41.7 and 500/13 = 38.5 - I'm okay with 40.

Factor in the swamp, and we're looking at rates of 80 on double moves, or 40 without.  So you're talking about, what, hasted, unarmored players?  I thought haste was retarded?  Why is your default position?

Oh, that's right, because you're trolling.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586430So we have a swamp, we have the party moving slower than usual, we have them in a wide open area... all of this is easy to work out.

You have established exactly none of this.  I cannot find the swamp you're referring to in the scenario, and you have not provided it.  They're moving at a normal speed for typical (non-swamp) terrain, so long as medium or heavier armor is likely.

Now, I'm not claiming I checked first.  It just so happens that your position of 'actual reality' is being invented as you go, and you're arguing yourself into a corner.

Quote from: Mr. GC;586430...but it isn't exactly hard to work out this is a wide open, wet area even before I specifically described it as a lake. And just to cut off more stupid posts - they were on a boat.

I might have been willing to concede that I missed it before, but I've looked at the 20 or so posts prior to the one I linked you, and I find nothing to substantiate your position.

Also, again going back to the SRD, rowboats move at 1.5 miles an hour, or 13.2 feet per round.  Nowhere close to 40.

Was it a speedboat?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;586369StormBringer makes me laugh.  He continues to be the most entertaining attraction to this website.  

Only because the delusion that you know what you are talking about.  Let's take a look.

QuoteIt's funny, because I don't think you did.  And BedrockBrendan clearly acknowledge that by RAW, that appears to be correct (though in the books it was vague).  He also has explained that while it may be RAW, it's a stupid rule and he doesn't use it.  

"Vague" does not equal "correct".  In other words, if the book says 'the sky is a kind of blue-ish colour', you cannot later say 'the book definitively says the sky is azure'.  I can't believe that is a difficult concept, even for you.

QuoteCan't find it?  You must be claiming a victory you haven't earned.  Or, you know, asserting a position and claiming it is right despite all evidence to the contrary.  

This is why people keep laughing at you, Mr Spock.  I didn't assert anything, I only pointed out that the other assertion wasn't actually solidly valid or accurate.  In other words, the very basics of any discussion revolve around who has the burden of proof.  In this case, it isn't me.  Your claims of vigorous adherence to coherent discussion fall pretty flat when you start asking people to prove negatives.

There is no 'all evidence to the contrary'.  There is one off-hand mention in an archive from almost 20 years ago.  And if you want to base arguments around the idea that RAW is paramount, then going outside of RAW simply because it agrees with you is just about the exact definition of hypocrisy.

You can continue to claim superiority in all matters, but when you make basic mistakes and then double down on them (ie, 'weighted averages are intellectually dishonest') while absolutely refusing to provide even the slightest evidence for your own assertions...  Well, let's just say you are not arguing with me, you are arguing with reality.  Which is why you and your cohort keep falling flat on your faces.

Mr. GC,

When driving with passengers, do you by chance always maintain the exact speed limit.  At all times?

Please answer with a yes or no, and feel free to give a reason why not if that's the case, thank you.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;586374I think this is a lot of his point.  The game as written tends to be unplayable for a lot of groups.

Yes, three decades of playing a game that was unplayable for a lot of groups.